Ladle 47
Moderator: Light
-
- Match Winner
- Posts: 638
- Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:36 am
Re: Ladle 47
Titanoboa wrote:It sucks when you lose.
Why do we have elimination tourneys? Wouldn't it all be better if nobody got eliminated and everyone got to play until the finals? No losers, all winners.
(I wouldn't mind a limit_time instead of limit_rounds and limit_score, it works great in pickup. However, the current system is awesome (correct me if i'm wrong. just speak up if ladle isn't your favorite fort event) and it allows for great matches. Really great matches. Why would we change that?)
Oh and I too had the opportunity to taste the bitterness of limit_rounds 10 this ladle. Score was like 74-86 against CTb in the first match, and they suicided & thus won the match. That sucked for us, but it was prolly fun for themAnd it was in no way an unfair victory.
But suicides are suicideswhat if it is
By the way here's a suggestion. How about a new setting that can give the enemy team x points if you suicide (no specific player, just the enemy team). I've always thought that it's unfair that you can die without giving the enemies any points, and it's becoming more and more common with tactical suicides.
Example: Team blue was awarded 2 points because Titanoboa committed suicide. I'm sure one of you can come up with a better wording though, haha.
(And before anyone says it.. No, I don't think score_suicide -2 would have the same effect at all.)
but what if it is 98-88 and it is 3v1 and the defender suicides to save the zone and from him being holed.

- INW
- Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:10 pm
- Location: Charlotte, NC, USA
Re: Ladle 47
This topic should be split into a ladle 48 discussion topic.
Maybe a vote will happen soon.
Maybe a vote will happen soon.
Re: Ladle 47
Limit_Score = pure awesomeness!sinewav wrote:If I were to change anything, I'd forget about limit_time and remove limit_rounds, making it purely based on score. It's pretty rare for a Ladle match to end on rounds, and there are plenty of matches that go on much too long and never reach 10 rounds, so, raising the round limit won't positively mean longer Ladles. In fact, raising the number of rounds creates more opportunities for exciting comebacks, which we can all agree is a good thing. And of course, making limit_score the only way to victory immediately eliminates team suicides.
Re: Ladle 47
+1 nice idea. I thought we had a comeback going on and it was cut short. It would only have taken 1 more round.sinewav wrote:If I were to change anything, I'd forget about limit_time and remove limit_rounds, making it purely based on score. It's pretty rare for a Ladle match to end on rounds, and there are plenty of matches that go on much too long and never reach 10 rounds, so, raising the round limit won't positively mean longer Ladles. In fact, raising the number of rounds creates more opportunities for exciting comebacks, which we can all agree is a good thing. And of course, making limit_score the only way to victory immediately eliminates team suicides.
pLxDari - Challenge us!
- INW
- Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:10 pm
- Location: Charlotte, NC, USA
Re: Ladle 47
I would vote for this idea. I don't really have a problem with the current ladle system but I wouldn't mind this.sinewav wrote:If I were to change anything, I'd forget about limit_time and remove limit_rounds, making it purely based on score. It's pretty rare for a Ladle match to end on rounds, and there are plenty of matches that go on much too long and never reach 10 rounds, so, raising the round limit won't positively mean longer Ladles. In fact, raising the number of rounds creates more opportunities for exciting comebacks, which we can all agree is a good thing. And of course, making limit_score the only way to victory immediately eliminates team suicides.
- 2020
- Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1322
- Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:21 pm
- Location: the present, finally
Re: Ladle 47
yup
round limit is a shadow from original fortress settings
no need for it in the ladle
i still think it might be a useful patch
if a whole 3 or 5 match game was programmed
which would have a time limit
but the number of teams don't demand this move yet...
in a bigger tournament
timing will become a real issue
and gratz to unk
round limit is a shadow from original fortress settings
no need for it in the ladle
i still think it might be a useful patch
if a whole 3 or 5 match game was programmed
which would have a time limit
but the number of teams don't demand this move yet...
in a bigger tournament
timing will become a real issue
and gratz to unk

hold the line
- ElmosWorld
- Match Winner
- Posts: 610
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:38 pm
Re: Ladle 47
If the gold defender suicides in that case blue gets 6 points anyway and wins the match.teen wrote:Titanoboa wrote:It sucks when you lose.
Why do we have elimination tourneys? Wouldn't it all be better if nobody got eliminated and everyone got to play until the finals? No losers, all winners.
(I wouldn't mind a limit_time instead of limit_rounds and limit_score, it works great in pickup. However, the current system is awesome (correct me if i'm wrong. just speak up if ladle isn't your favorite fort event) and it allows for great matches. Really great matches. Why would we change that?)
Oh and I too had the opportunity to taste the bitterness of limit_rounds 10 this ladle. Score was like 74-86 against CTb in the first match, and they suicided & thus won the match. That sucked for us, but it was prolly fun for themAnd it was in no way an unfair victory.
But suicides are suicideswhat if it is
By the way here's a suggestion. How about a new setting that can give the enemy team x points if you suicide (no specific player, just the enemy team). I've always thought that it's unfair that you can die without giving the enemies any points, and it's becoming more and more common with tactical suicides.
Example: Team blue was awarded 2 points because Titanoboa committed suicide. I'm sure one of you can come up with a better wording though, haha.
(And before anyone says it.. No, I don't think score_suicide -2 would have the same effect at all.)
but what if it is 98-88 and it is 3v1 and the defender suicides to save the zone and from him being holed.

- INW
- Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:10 pm
- Location: Charlotte, NC, USA
Re: Ladle 47
Am I reading this correctly? 88 + 6 = 94 < 98?ElmosWorld wrote:If the gold defender suicides in that case blue gets 6 points anyway and wins the match.teen wrote:Titanoboa wrote:It sucks when you lose.
Why do we have elimination tourneys? Wouldn't it all be better if nobody got eliminated and everyone got to play until the finals? No losers, all winners.
(I wouldn't mind a limit_time instead of limit_rounds and limit_score, it works great in pickup. However, the current system is awesome (correct me if i'm wrong. just speak up if ladle isn't your favorite fort event) and it allows for great matches. Really great matches. Why would we change that?)
Oh and I too had the opportunity to taste the bitterness of limit_rounds 10 this ladle. Score was like 74-86 against CTb in the first match, and they suicided & thus won the match. That sucked for us, but it was prolly fun for themAnd it was in no way an unfair victory.
But suicides are suicideswhat if it is
By the way here's a suggestion. How about a new setting that can give the enemy team x points if you suicide (no specific player, just the enemy team). I've always thought that it's unfair that you can die without giving the enemies any points, and it's becoming more and more common with tactical suicides.
Example: Team blue was awarded 2 points because Titanoboa committed suicide. I'm sure one of you can come up with a better wording though, haha.
(And before anyone says it.. No, I don't think score_suicide -2 would have the same effect at all.)
but what if it is 98-88 and it is 3v1 and the defender suicides to save the zone and from him being holed.
- DDMJ
- Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1882
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:15 am
- Location: LA, CA, USA, NA
- Contact:
Re: Ladle 47
No INW you aren't because blue has 98...98 + 6 = 104 > 88
He meant 1v3 where the team that has the 1 is up 98-88. But then it would be tied 98 - 98, so perhaps he really meant 98 - 90?
He meant 1v3 where the team that has the 1 is up 98-88. But then it would be tied 98 - 98, so perhaps he really meant 98 - 90?
- INW
- Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:10 pm
- Location: Charlotte, NC, USA
Re: Ladle 47
oic, I thought blue had the 1.DDMJ wrote:No INW you aren't because blue has 98...98 + 6 = 104 > 88
He meant 1v3 where the team that has the 1 is up 98-88. But then it would be tied 98 - 98, so perhaps he really meant 98 - 90?
Ya, if yellow suicides, blue would get the round win points and win anyway.
I'm a derp.
- ElmosWorld
- Match Winner
- Posts: 610
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:38 pm
Re: Ladle 47
Wouldn't you assume that gold wouldn't get the zone and would still lose 98-94(or 96 depending on whether the death gave points or not)?DDMJ wrote:No INW you aren't because blue has 98...98 + 6 = 104 > 88
He meant 1v3 where the team that has the 1 is up 98-88. But then it would be tied 98 - 98, so perhaps he really meant 98 - 90?

Re: Ladle 47
I think he wanted to point out that, without getting points for the suicide of an enemy, the defender has the opportunity to end the round with the score 98-98. In any other case the team of the defender would lose the match, so all in all this supports the idea of points for the enemy team if a player suicides.
- apparition
- Match Winner
- Posts: 630
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:59 am
- Location: The Mitten, USA
Re: Ladle 47
Congratulationssssssss team.uNk.team!!!! Well done mates! I totally called it in my head 
